I am a recruiter for the military and due to strictly his past and/or his tatooes I would not be legally allowed to hire him. Both make him unqualified, and I agree with that fully. Freedom of speech can only go so far IMO......even on this site. We wont stop you from saying what you want ever, but we reserve the right to ban you for what you say. I also would understand if the UFC forced Cain V to either cover his tat or just plain leave too. There is no room for that kind of bs. Just my opinion but I was upset when I saw his weigh in pics and very glad to see Bowling TKO him.

]Oh come on you don't hate to break it to him, you love to people why their opinions are wrong but I aggree that this is obviously not hard information to obtain and the AC and Strikeforce really dropped the ball, I'm sure someone(s) catching hell for it. I'm kind of curious as to whether we would care as much if he was 17 at the time, would he still be a pedophile?

She was 12. I'd argue yes, but that's not the point. You're aware of what encompasses turning 18. Sexual contact with a 12 year old when you're 18 is not only highly illegal, it's just plain weird. Why would you want to have sex/fool around with a 12 year old when you're 18? There's plenty of 16-18 year old that you should be focused on instead.

Also, it's worth noting that the state of Ohio considers him a HIGH risk sex offender. This means that the facts of the case caused Ohio to believe that he is likely to re-offend.

Were this a situation of an 18 year old having sex with his 16 or 17 year old girlfriend, I highly doubt that they would have labeled him a high risk offender. He still might have to register as a sex-offender, but I'm sure most people would say "he ran into an overzealous DA who wanted to make an example of him." The simple fact of the matter is that the facts of the case, even though they're shielded because a minor was involved, were severe enough to warrant the high risk offender label.

This reminds me of that one dude that fought in Pride with all the racist tattoos. He had bolts and crosshairs. But yea I think this dude should be allowed to fight. It is not a far jump to say Jeff Monson shouldnt be allowed to fight because of his beliefs and actions. Fighting is fighting and has nothing to do with politics. Should we not let Court McGee fight cause he did drugs in the past?

There is a big difference between Jeff Monson's beliefs and this guys. I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU WOULD COMPARE MONSON'S LEFT WING VIEWS WITH THOSE OF A RACIST/PEDOFILE. Communism and Anarchism have nothing to do with racism AT ALL. I am not sure if that is where you were going with it but you would think that someone waving the CRASS logo would be a little clearer or more educated on the subject.

You are misunderstanding. Saying this guy cannot fight because of his racist beliefs is exactly like saying Monson cant fight because of his anarchist beliefs. When you start saying fighters cant fight because of their beliefs whos to say what will allowed and what will not be allowed.

Now I know there is alot more to this than that involving the crimes and whatnot. But purely on the belief thing I cant say he shouldnt be allowed to fight because of his beliefs.

P.S. Yes I have the Crass logo as my picture as they are one of my favorite bands. I am anarchist and support freedom. I do not support racism but I support peoples right to believe what they want. Oppression is oppression. I am standing up for this guys freedom when it comes to his beliefs not standing up for what he believes.

Of course it's weird, and in my mind he'd be a pedophile even if he was 17. I'm not trying to defend the guy or the Idea that it's ok for a high school senior to have sex with a 6th grader I'm just posing a question. It's just strange to me how the law makes it one crime at 18 and another at 17. Either way hes still a hillbilly pervert. As far as the tat's go, I don't really care but I can't see why a high profile organization would have anything to do with him.

Last edited 3/4/12 8:49PM server time by machodog76Edit note/reason: n/a

i could not find details on what he did but he is registered as "Gross Sexual Imposition"

which is basically described as forcing someone into sexual contact. LINK

a child 13 or under falls into this as they are not able to give consent. this doesnt mean he raped a 13 year old. i think calling all sex offenders pedophiles is excessive.

the "WHITE STEEL" tattoo? who cares ? Cain has "BROWN PRIDE" and im sure there are a number of similar tattoos on various other fighters of different ethnic backgrounds.

Who cares if he is a racist? its not illegal to believe that being white is superior to other ethnic backgrounds no matter how ignorant it is. its also not illegal to pursue a career and make a living because your a registered sex offender. I'd rather him fighting on the undercard of a strikeforce event than collecting a government unemployment check.

there are a number of scumbags in this sport i dont see why this one should be dealt a special exclusion.

I think you're missing the point of this thread. It's not that he WAS allowed to fight, it's that neither Strikeforce nor Ohio were aware of his improprieties when they hired him and licensed him as a fighter.

They both admitted that they had no clue. Hence why the state of Ohio is launching a full investigation.

I hate to break it to you, but forcing someone into having sexual contact IS rape. The key word in there, as you so aptly pointed out, is forced. Also, he was 18 and she was 12. I'm pretty sure that pedophile applies in this case.

As i said I couldnt find details of his crime. It seemed that people were attaching the pedo tag based on being a sex offender and nobody was posting his actual crime.

Also i didnt say it wasnt rape.

If their application for a license doesnt ask "are you a registered sex offender?" i dont see why it matters, it clearly doesnt matter to them. However, if it asks about past felony charges, like most job applications, and he didnt mention this then he is in the wrong and hopefully see consequences to his actions.

People are saying this guy shouldnt be allowed to make a living as a fighter but what do you suppose he should do? It's perfectly ok for him to prepare your food in a restaurant or build your house but he cant get beat up on tv to collect a pay check?

This reminds me of that one dude that fought in Pride with all the racist tattoos. He had bolts and crosshairs. But yea I think this dude should be allowed to fight. It is not a far jump to say Jeff Monson shouldnt be allowed to fight because of his beliefs and actions. Fighting is fighting and has nothing to do with politics. Should we not let Court McGee fight cause he did drugs in the past?

I've got to agree with you. And I'd like to add that free speech and opinion are rights that Americans are supposed to have. Free speech means people are free to talk about whatever they like, regardless of how offensive or ignorant their opinion may be in the eyes of others.

Just like we should have the right to say people like that are scumbags. As much as I despise ignorance and racism, I certainly don't trust the government, or any group to censor what people can say. So we have to accept peoples rights to make ignorant, racist statements. We should just point out the ignorance behind their beliefs, and actions. And boycott companies that blatantly support things we don't support.

If I were running Strikeforce...or any kind of business I certainly wouldn't give any of my money to racists, or child molesters. Although in most cases I believe if a criminal serves his time he has repaid his debt to society and should be given a second chance, so it's hypocritical of me to say Saling doesn`t deserve one. But I wouldn't give him one. I don't think they run criminal checks on these guys, and I can't say I blame them for that. No that they know, I hope it won't happen again.

i could not find details on what he did but he is registered as "Gross Sexual Imposition"

which is basically described as forcing someone into sexual contact. LINK

a child 13 or under falls into this as they are not able to give consent. this doesnt mean he raped a 13 year old. i think calling all sex offenders pedophiles is excessive.

the "WHITE STEEL" tattoo? who cares ? Cain has "BROWN PRIDE" and im sure there are a number of similar tattoos on various other fighters of different ethnic backgrounds.

Who cares if he is a racist? its not illegal to believe that being white is superior to other ethnic backgrounds no matter how ignorant it is. its also not illegal to pursue a career and make a living because your a registered sex offender. I'd rather him fighting on the undercard of a strikeforce event than collecting a government unemployment check.

there are a number of scumbags in this sport i dont see why this one should be dealt a special exclusion.

I think you're missing the point of this thread. It's not that he WAS allowed to fight, it's that neither Strikeforce nor Ohio were aware of his improprieties when they hired him and licensed him as a fighter.

They both admitted that they had no clue. Hence why the state of Ohio is launching a full investigation.

I hate to break it to you, but forcing someone into having sexual contact IS rape. The key word in there, as you so aptly pointed out, is forced. Also, he was 18 and she was 12. I'm pretty sure that pedophile applies in this case.

As i said I couldnt find details of his crime. It seemed that people were attaching the pedo tag based on being a sex offender and nobody was posting his actual crime.

Also i didnt say it wasnt rape.

If their application for a license doesnt ask "are you a registered sex offender?" i dont see why it matters, it clearly doesnt matter to them. However, if it asks about past felony charges, like most job applications, and he didnt mention this then he is in the wrong and hopefully see consequences to his actions.

People are saying this guy shouldnt be allowed to make a living as a fighter but what do you suppose he should do? It's perfectly ok for him to prepare your food in a restaurant or build your house but he cant get beat up on tv to collect a pay check?

NCordless did attach a crime of his. Just saying.

Also, you're legally REQUIRED to disclose that you're a sex offender. As far as I know.

My problem is that nobody did their due diligence. I'm not exactly arguing that this guy can't make a living. I would just like to know about it before hand. I can choose whether or not to watch his fights.

a child 13 or under falls into this as they are not able to give consent. this doesnt mean he raped a 13 year old.

Not to beat a dead horse, but this statement is almost offensive. Rape presupposes a "lack of consent," and the reason all pedophiles are deemed rapists at the state level and by most non-pedophiles is because most of us are aware that a child has no idea what it is exactly he or she is consenting to. Therefore, every sexual encounter between an adult and a child is rape. I only had the faintest idea what it was when I was twelve.

Posted by RearNakedJoke

there are a number of scumbags in this sport i dont see why this one should be dealt a special exclusion.

In lieu of a long-winded answer, I'll just give you an answer from the gut: "Just because."

Posted by RearNakedJoke

As i said I couldnt find details of his crime. It seemed that people were attaching the pedo tag based on being a sex offender and nobody was posting his actual crime.

According to Ohio state law, Gross Sexual Imposition occurs when a perpetrator forces a party to have sexual contact with another party against their will. The forced sexual contact is not with the offender.

The offender perpetrates this by using force, threatening to use force or intentionally impairing the victim’s judgment. A perpetrator can impair a victim’s judgment by drugging him or him until they reach a state of unconsciousness, allowing the perpetrator to oblige them to engage in sexual activity.

Gross sexual imposition occurs when the victim is younger than thirteen years of age, whether or not the perpetrator is aware of the victim’s real age.

The conviction stems from an incident in October of 2004, when Staling, then 18, was indicted on one count of engaging in unlawful sexual conduct, a first-degree felony, in connection with the rape of a person under 13.

Last edited 3/4/12 11:44PM server time by lohmannEdit note/reason: n/a2 total post edits